PETITION. MOTION FOR AN ADDRESS. (Hansard, 28 July 1871)

EARL NELSON
, having presented a Petition of Clergy of the rural deanery of Stepnoy— That in any scheme for the re-arrangement of the Hospital of St. Katherine near the Tower the spiritual character of the foundation and the local claims of the original precincts may be recognised, proceeded to move the Address of which he had given Notice. He said he was directly at variance with the 29th clause of the Report of the Commission, which stated, with regard to those schemes relating to the local application of the fund—that it would not be expedient to fix on the property a merely local character, inasmuch as the Hospital never had such a character when it was originally instituted. As far as he understood, from the very first foundation of the Hospital, notwithstanding an order for the praying for souls, it had a local character. It was perfectly true that in 1545, in Henry VIII.'s reign, there was a Commission issued, when the property of the Hospital was seized for a time, and an inventory was made of it. By the first alteration in the original constitution of the Hospital, Catherine Parr nominated laymen, and in Edward VI.'s reign a layman was nominated, and in Elizabeth's reign another layman was nominated, named Dr. Wilson. But even Dr. Wilson, who tried to make it a lay institution more than any others, was obliged, and his lay successors had been obliged, and the present master—at least the late master—had been also obliged to acknowledge a clause which showed that the head of the Hospital was ecclesiastical. Dr. Wilson was actually sued for non-payment of tenths, and he succeeded in defending himself, by pleading that the Hospital was for the relief of poor men and women. But in 1640 an action was brought by one master of the Hospital against the executor of another master, and in the pleadings of both sides it was stated to be a beneficium ecclesiasticum. It began again to take its own character, and in 1681 the clerical brothers re-appeared. It was classed in the same list with the collegiate church of Westminster and others, and they all stood in the same category. Another strong proof of its local character was, that there was attached to the Hospital 383 a peculiar jurisdiction, whereby all causes were tried within the precincts by the Chancellor; and though this was not acted on till the end, he believed that that peculiar jurisdiction was not repealed until 1846, when the Act was passed for abolishing old and peculiar jurisdictions. But he also found that up to the time of the removal of the Hospital the brothers regularly performed the pastoral duties of the parish, acting as pastoral clergy within the precincts. Under the 148th section of the Dock Act the Hospital was removed from its position, and the terms of the clause showed that up to the time of its removal it had been specially connected with the locality where it was placed. And here he wished to say that the remarks which he made two years ago in reference to the maladministration of the funds of the Hospital ought not to be held to reflect on those who filled offices therein, and he was happy to state that when he went to Stepney the other day he found that the lay master of the Hospital was doing a great work for the benefit of the eastern parts of London, at St. John's, Bethnal Green. In the new scheme it should therefore be placed again in a locality where it was capable of being of use, and he thought he was not asking too much, in requiring that it should be restored to the neighbourhood of the now dense locality from which it had been originally removed. The new scheme, which was to have an enlarged school in the Regent's Park, could not, he maintained, be carried out beneficially in the locality in which the Hospital was at present placed. There were there very few children to go to the schools, and very few persons among whom the master and the brothers and sisters would be able to minister. There was no use, therefore, in making them resident, if they were obliged to reside in a place where they could do little or no good. He was pleading on behalf of the eastern parts of the Metropolis, which required some persons who would deal with the spiritual destitution of the district. He had a dear friend, Mr. Edward Denison, whose death all who knew him must deeply deplore, and who found the best way to relieve those who lived in that quarter was not to give them money, but to go and live among them; and if the Hospital were only removed to the old place, the master, with £800 a-year, 384 and the brothers and sisters with their £400 a-year, would be just the stamp of persons whose presence in the district was most required. They would effect a great deal of good, which could not be accomplished in the locality in which the Hospital was now situated; and it was for those reasons he now moved the Address of which he had given Notice.

THE LORD CHANCELLOR
, as one of the Commissioners who had made the recommendation in favour of the present scheme, said, he felt it his duty to state how and why it was that the Commissioners, after much consideration of the various schemes which were presented, reported that they would not be justified in recommending the re-transfer of the Hospital to the locality from which it had been for upwards of 40 years removed. Looking into the early foundation of this charity—a charity of a very singular description—of which the Queen Consort, when there was one, was the patron, he saw that it was founded a good deal earlier than the noble Earl (Earl Nelson) appeared to suppose, for the foundress was Matilda, widow of King Stephen. There was an augmentation of the charity by Eleanor, wife of Henry III.; but the original documents in regard, to the foundress and Queen Eleanor had not been discovered, and all that was known of them was obtained from charters of a later date, granted in the reigns of the Edwards and Henry VI. It did not, moreover, from the first, appear to be a charity that was localized in the sense in which the noble Earl seemed to speak, for it was not a charity which had its origin in any particular regard or affection for the particular place in which it happened to be situated. It was a charity of a special class, and Queen Philippa extended the scope of the duties of the kind of college or body which had been established by the foundress, and precribed that they must see the poor, visit 385 the sick, and educate children. But that was not for the benefit of any particular district. The building had been placed at St. Katherine's, but not for the special benefit of the particular district. The charity had twice been the subject of decrees of the Court of Chancery — one in the time of Lord Somers, when several regulations for the purpose of preventing the taking of large fines and granting leases were made. Provision was also made for the education of a certain number of boys and girls. The second investigation in Chancery was in the time of Lord Lyndhurst, owing to what had taken place in reference to St. Katherine's Docks and the removal of the institution. St. Katherine's Docks not only swallowed up the local habitation of the foundation, but it also swallowed up the habitations of many poor almspeople, and their houses were removed and a large amount of population entirely destroyed. At that time it would, no doubt, have been a very good and seasonable opportunity for saying—"We will raise the question whether this charity should not be continued in this place where it has been for so many years." All that, however, was discussed in the scheme which came before Lord Lyndhurst, and it was ultimately resolved in Chancery, 46 years ago, that the institution should be placed in the situation it now occupied in Regent's Park. The arrangement which was then made was not, perhaps, quite that which the Commissioners would desire. The master had too liberal an allowance, which it was proposed to reduce from £1,200 to £800, and it was proposed that the master's house should be turned into a school. Many suggestions had been made as to the purpose to which the funds might be made applicable. One plan was for building a church in the parish of St. Greorge's-in-the-East, another was for founding a sisterhood in the locality. There was nothing in the statutes to show that it was designed that this institution should benefit a particular locality, and the present neighbourhood in which it was founded had partaken of its benefits for the last 46 years. Lord Lyndhurst's scheme increased the number of boys and girls to be placed in the school, and in that position the Commissioners found the Hospital. They thought that the funds of the institution might be greatly 386 increased, and so they could be at once by £2,000 a-year, or, if more time were given, by £4,000 a-year. The Commissioners were also of opinion that a valuable boarding-school might be established in connection with the day school, and scholarships were founded, which were to be supported out of the increased funds. Having arrived at these conclusions, they did not deem it desirable that the boarding-school should be located near St. Katherine's Docks where the children should dwell. They believed the Regent's Park to be a more healthy residence, and when the noble Earl said the same amount of good could not be done there, he would observe that while no one could dispute that there were a greater number of cases of distress at the East-end of the town, yet it must not be supposed there were no destitute poor in the vicinity of Regent's Park, or no persons standing in need of religious ministration. He should also bear in mind that children might be sent to the boarding-school from the East-end, and that they would be better located in the Regent's Park on the score of health. In a word, the Commissioners found nothing to show that the charity was originally provided for the benefit of a particular district, and that its having been situated at St. Katherine's Docks was simply an accidental circumstance, and they accordingly did not feel in a position to advise Her Majesty to recognize any local claims such as those which the noble Earl advocated. He hoped, therefore, their Lordships would not assent to the Motion, and would abstain from doing anything which would tend to overthrow a scheme which had been decided on after long and anxious consideration.

THE BISHOP OF LONDON
, having expressed his regret at the absence of the Archbishop of Canterbury, who took a great interest in the subject, said, he felt it to be his duty to support the Motion. The real point at issue was, he contended, a very narrow one, and resolved itself into the question where the charity ought to be established; and in connection with that part of the subject he must maintain there was nothing in the statutes to lead to the belief that it was not the intention of the founder to benefit the locality in which the Hospital was founded. There was no doubt that in the beginning of that century, before 387 the Hospital was removed, there was in the neighbourhood of St. Katherine's a cure of souls, a church, a minister's house, and there was also a large population who had no other church to go to. The first persons to be attended to should be those who lived in the immediate neighbourhood of the original foundation, and there was the more reason for it in this particular instance because the formation of the Docks brought into the place a class of people who stood peculiarly in need of temporal and spiritual assistance. He knew none who stood more in need of such assistance than the class of dock labourers. He did not agree altogether with the noble Earl (Earl Nelson) that there were no poor to be found in the vicinity of Regent's Park; but he did agree with him in thinking that the needs of those around St. Katherine's Docks were very much greater. He, for one, thought the money might be better distributed than by the scheme which the Commissioners recommended, for it appeared from the speech of the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack that a large school was to be built in a neighbourhood which was able to supply its own wants. But what was asked by the noble Earl and himself was, that the school should be in the neighbourhood of the original foundation, where the people were not able to supply their own wants.

LORD DE ROS
, as one perfectly acquainted with the locality to which the Motion referred, said, he could bear testimony to the wants of the district. The noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack had said that when the Hospital was originally founded the place was not very populous; but the same could not be said to be the case now, for Wapping, Shadwell, East Smithfield, and the neighbouring districts were among the most populous places of London, and this charity was established for the benefit of the people who lived there. It would certainly be of much greater use in the neighbourhood of St. Katherine's Docks now than it could possibly be at the Regent's Park.